V. I. Lenin

Once More on Partyism and Non-Partyism

Published:Novy DyenNo. 9, September 14 (27), 1909. Signed:Vl. Ilyin.

      Published according to the text inNovy Dyen.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,

      Progress Publishers,[1974],

      Moscow,Volume 16,

      pages62-64.Translated:Transcription\Markup:R. CymbalaCopyleft:V. I. Lenin Internet Archive (www.marxists.org)
      © 2004

      Permission is granted to copy and/or distribute this document under the
      terms of theGNU Free Documentation License.

Thequestion of Party and non-Party, necessary and
“unnecessary”, candidatures is undoubtedly one of the most important—if
not the most important—in the present Duma election, First of all and
above all, the electors and the broad masses who are watching the election
must realisewhythe election is necessary,whatis the
task that faces a Duma deputy,whatthe tactics of a
St. Petersburg deputy in the Third Duma should be. But a really full and
accurate idea of all this is possible only if the whole election campaign
is of a Party character.

Forthose who desire in the election to uphold the interests of the
really broad and broadest masses the first and foremost task is to develop
the political consciousness of the masses. The more this consciousness is
developed, and in inseparable connection with its development, the more
clearly defined is the grouping of the masses according to the real
interests of the various classes of the population. All non-partyism, even
under exceptionally favourable conditions, invariably indicates that
clarity and maturity are lacking in the political consciousness of the
candidate, the groups or parties supporting him and the mass of people who
take part in his election.

Inthe case of all the parties devoid of proper organisation and a
clear-cut and principled programme, whose aim in the election is to cater
for the interests of particular small groups, of the propertied classes,
the development of the political consciousness of the masses is always
thrust into the back ground, while a clear class grouping of the masses is
practically always regarded as undesirable and dangerous. For those who
have no desire to come to the. defence of the bourgeois parties clarity of
political consciousness and of classalignment comes before everything. This, of course, does not exclude
temporary joint actions by different parties in certain special cases, but
it does absolutely exclude all non-partyism and all weakening or obscuring
of party character.

Butfor the very reason that we uphold the party principle, in the
interests of the broad masses, for the sake of freeing them from any kind
of bourgeois influence, for the sake of the fullest clarity of class
alignments, we must exert to the maximum our strength and vigilance to see
that the Party principle is observed not inwords merely, but in
fact.

Thenon-party candidate Kuzmin-Karavayev, who has already been labelled
an “unnecessary candidate”, lays down that, strictly speaking, there are
no party candidates at the elections in St. Petersburg. This opinion is so
false that it is not worth pausing to refute it. It is impossible to doubt
that Kutler and N. D. Sokolov are party candidates. Kuzmin Karavayev is led
astray partly by the fact that neither of the parties which have nominated
them are existing quite openly as such. But if this makes it difficult to
run the elections on a party basis it does not do away with the necessity
of it. To give in tosuchdifficulties, to fold one’s arms in face
of them, is absolutely identical with acceding to Mr. Stolypin’s desire to
hear confirmation of his “constitutionalism” from the lips of the
“opposition” (the so-called opposition).

Forthe masses who are taking part in the St. Petersburg election it is
particularly important now to find outwhichparties havegiven upin face of these difficulties and which of them have,
preserved in their entirety both their programme and their slogans; which
have tried to “adapt themselves” to the reactionary regime by curtailing
and restricting their Duma activity, their press and their organisation to
the framework of this regime and which of them have adapted themselves to
it by changing certain forms of activity, but not by any means by clipping
their slogans in the Duma, or by strait-jacketing their press,
organisation, etc. Such a comprehensive inquiry, based on the history of
the parties, based on the facts of their activity inside and outside the
Duma, should be the main content of the election campaign. The masses
should, in this new and, for democrats, moredifficult situation, re-acquaint themselves with thepartieswhich
claim the title of democratic. The masses should familiarise themselves
again and again with the features that distinguish the bourgeois democrats
from the democrats who have nominated N. D. Sokolov on this occasion, the
differences in their general outlook, ultimate aims, their attitude to the
task of the great international movement for emancipation, their ability to
uphold the ideals and methods of the movement for emancipation in
Russia. The masses must come out of this election campaign more
party-conscious, more clearly aware of the interests, aims, slogans, points
of view and methods of action of the different classes—that is the
permanent result which the political trend represented by N. D. Sokolov
values above everything and, which it gill be able to achieve by the most
strenuous, unwavering, persistent and comprehensive work.